Byron Coy Phmsa

8/3/2019 Byron Coy Phmsa

1/32

Leak Detection

APR-2008: USDOT/PHMSA1

Leak DetectionUS Department of TransportationPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

Byron Coy, PE


2/32

Leak Detection


PHMSA Regions


3/32

Leak Detection


Leak Detection

Congressional Report API Information Resources

Regulations

Implementation Considerations


4/32

Leak Detection


0

50

100

150

200

250

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

HazardousLiquidAccidents19972007

MedianVolume

Lost

(Barrels)

Medianbblslost AccidentsLinear(Medianbblslost)

Source: DOT/PHMSAaccident data,asofDec.21,2007

(accidentsmeetingquantitativereportingcriteria;50bblsormore)


5/32


6/32

Leak Detection


Leak Detection


7/32

Leak Detection


PIPES Act of 2006, Section 21Congressional Report

Capabilities and Limitations

Leak Volume Statistics

Other Factors impacting Leak Volume

Regulatory Requirements

Inspection Findings

Fostering Improvements


8/32

Leak Detection


Emphasis on Prevention

Congressional Report

Surveillance

Cathodic Protection Pressure Control

Relief Systems

Damage Prevention Line Marking

One-Call Systems

Public Awareness

Common Ground Alliance

Pipelines and Informed Planning Alliance - PIPA


9/32

Leak Detection


Pipeline Characteristics


Pipe Specs, Vintage, History

Coatings Operating Parameters

Transported Commodities

Climatic Conditions

Geologic Factors

High Consequence Areas


10/32

Leak Detection


Leak Detection Methodologies


Visual Inspection / Observation Internal Instrumentation

External Instrumentation


11/32

Leak Detection


General Relationships


Threshold with less uncertainty

Threshold with more uncertainty

Detection Time

LeakS

ize


12/32

Leak Detection


General Relationships


Threshold with less uncertainty

Threshold with more uncertainty

Detection Time

LeakS

ize


13/32

Leak Detection


Considerations for Evaluating AdequacyCongressional Report

Rate of Invalid (False) Alarms and Miss-calls

Instrument Accuracy & System Robustness

Personnel Training and Qualification Criteria

Pipeline Size, Complexity, Batch Parameters Leak Size / Flow Rate

Response Time Components

Leak Volume and Location Estimation

Detecting Pre-existing Leaks Shut-in Pipeline Segments

Slack Line and Transients

Multiphase Flow

Adaptability (Retrofit) Feasibility

Testing Regimes

Cost & Maintenance


14/32

Leak Detection


API Publication 1149

Pipeline Variable Uncertainties and Their Effects on Leak Detectability

Quantification of factors such as:

Pipeline Configuration and Operating Regimes

Instrumentation Placement

Metering

Data Collection and Handling

Impacts:

Feasibility Studies

Project Justification

Prioritization of Budgeted Changes

Instrument Density and Placement


15/32

Leak Detection


API RP-1130

CPM (Computational Pipeline Monitoring) Systems

Assist in identifying issues relevant to:

Design

Selection

Implementation

Operation

Testing

Directly Referenced in 49 CFR 195 Regulations


16/32

Leak Detection


49 CFR Parts 195.134 / 444Design and O&M

195.134

Design Criteria for CPM Systems API RP-1130

195.444

Operations and Maintenance Testing

Record Keeping

Controller Training

API RP-1130


17/32


18/32

Leak Detection


49 CFR 195.452(i)(1)

What preventive and mitigative measures must anoperator take to protect the high consequence area?

General Requirements

An operator must take measures to prevent and mitigate the

consequences of a pipeline failure that could affect a high consequence

area (HCA)

These measures include conducting a risk analysis of the pipelinesegment to identify additional actions to enhance public safety and/or

protecting the environment

Actions like modifying the processes or systems for monitoring

pressure and detect leaks


19/32

Leak Detection


49 CFR 195.452(i)(2)


Risk analysis criteria

In identifying the need for additional measures, an operator mustevaluate the likelihood of a pipeline release occurring and how a

release could affect HCAs

This determination must consider all relevant risk factors, including,

but not limited to: Terrain surrounding the pipeline segment

Elevation profile

Characteristics of the product transported

Amount of product that could be released

Possibility of a spillage using terrestrial conducts

Roadside ditches along the pipeline

Exposure of the pipeline to pressures exceeding MOP


20/32

Leak Detection


49 CFR 195.452(i)(3)


Leak Detection Provisions

An operator must have a means to detect leaks on its pipeline system

An operator must evaluate the capability of its leak detection meansand modify, as necessary, to protect the high consequence area

An operator's evaluation must (at least) consider, the following factors: Length and size of the pipeline

Type of product carried

The pipeline's proximity to HCAs

The swiftness of leak detection

Nearest response personnel, leak history and risk assessment results

Leak detection analysis should include the impact of sudden significantfailures, as well as smaller leaks that may take longer to detect


21/32


22/32

Leak Detection


Preventive & Mitigative Measures

for Leak Detection and EFRDs

Assessment

Documented, systematic process to identify, evaluate, and implement

additional preventive and mitigative measures

Review of the effectiveness of current processes and systems

Consideration of alternative modes of operation

Consideration, or documented exclusion, of all risk factors in (i)(2)

Priority in schedule and scope for additional actions on the highest risk

lines

Documentation of candidate measures, even those not implemented


23/32

Leak Detection


Leak Detection Capability

Evaluation

If all required factors (i)(3) are not considered, a documented basis for the

exclusion of certain listed factors Consideration of additional evaluation factors such as:

Current leak detection method for the HCA areas

Use of SCADA

Thresholds for leak detection

Flow and pressure measurement

Specific procedures for lines that are idle but still is use

Additional LD provisions for proximity to sole source water supplies Testing of leak detection (such as physical removal of product)


24/32

Leak Detection



Capability Provisions

Sufficient spectrum of leak scenarios to determine system

effectiveness (e.g., most likely & maximum possible)

Line operations including slack line, idled line, and static conditions Performance during transient conditions, and a strategy to manage any

short-term reduced performance

Operational availability and reliability of the leak detection systems,

and the operators process to manage system outages

Enhancements to existing leak detection capability, consistent

application of a risk-based decision-making process for leak detection

Consideration of computational pipeline monitoring and API-1130


25/32

Leak Detection



Controller/Operator Actions and Reactions

Actions should be based on documented work practices and/or covered

in guidance or training material Integration of emergency response procedures

Assurance for the restoration of any mute/disable functions that are

used during certain operational modes

If procedures require such contact before action, assurance that any

required supervision is always promptly available for contact

Adequate guidance in documented work processes: authority and

responsibility

Corporate directive or policy on authority and responsibility


26/32

Leak Detection


Enhancing Leak Detection for HCAs

More frequent visual surveillance or patrolling

Automating data collection for segment over-short analysis

Integrating alarm and status information between connected pipelines

Use of, or more frequent, operational shut-in tests

Addition and/or the relocation of instrumentation

Application or tighter parameters on pressure/flow deviation

monitoring

Higher degree of data integration between operations support

applications Establishing or shortening test intervals, to validate expected

performance levels


27/32


28/32

Leak Detection


Frequently Asked Questions

http://primis.rspa.dot.gov/iim/faqs.htm#7

9.4 : Criteria for consideration of leak detection enhancements 9.5 : Minimally acceptable leak detection for compliance

9.6 : Application of CPM systems

9.11 : Leak detection applied to the entire pipeline


29/32

Leak Detection


Alignment with Resources

Leak detection system complexity or high cost does not

directly translate to better performance

One size does not necessarily fit all

Design choices need to be balanced with available and

committed operating and maintenance resources

After implementation, field crews will likely be impacted

by a need for more instrument maintenance

Controllers need to know the expected performance

thresholds and operating window of applied leak detectionsystem


30/32

Leak Detection


Application Note

Reconciling Hourly Line Balance

3 Inbound and 5 Outbound Lines 15 Minute Process

Is once/hour adequate ?

Information Knowledge


31/32

Leak Detection


Information - Knowledge

One has to have access to the right information

and the ability to understand it, before safety can be maximized.

The responsibility to react, without having adequate and structured

knowledge, adds little safety value.

In fact - it can create a false sense of security.


32/32

Leak Detection


Leak DetectionUSDOT / Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

Byron Coy, PE

Dir., Eastern Region

[email protected]
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]

Byron Coy Phmsa

Documents